Shane: I encourage you to re-do your photos for posting here and either lose the watermark or place it more strategically so as not to interfere with viewing of the images. It might seem like a small thing, but much of this is about the initial impression made by the photo, and your watermarks are too intrusive for that first impression to look beyond them.

Having said that, #7 is the winner for me, and I wonder if you couldn't add some punch to it in post-processing. I also like #8, though my preference would be for a shift of your subject to the right third of the frame. #6 is a really cute photo that might benefit from some color adjustment. Of the others, #4 is well timed, and the same with #5, though with her face in shadow and being so close to the edge of the frame, I'm not sure it works.

You're preaching to the choir about gymnastics being a difficult sport to shoot. Sounds like you had serious lighting challenges. You've done a nice job, and if you continue to shoot, you should be able to make some adjustments based on your experience this time out that will help you moving forward.

Russ...I will take the advice on the watermark..I was just to lazy to reexport them but I will for sure next time. I know it's hard to look past and give feedback looking at it.

Thanks on the feedback..I really need to work on post processing and make sure I get the color and stuff better..I was looking at yours and just wondering if those were right out of the camera or if they needed some in post because I have yet to get that out of the camera..

I only cropped #8 like that because it was a horrible background to the left with the judges and bars. Will work on them and try and repost..Thanks again!
Shane

Russ can chime in on the practicality of this, but if the light really stinks, what about dropping the shutter way down to like 1/50th of a second and trying to get those moments when the head is still, but everything else is moving. In other words, take advantage of the bad light. Definitely a trickier type of shot to get and not for all apparatus and possibly only viable with higher end athletes, but it might work.

On the actual pictures... very nice work. Don't sweat the watermark. Photo editors at publications don't. It is not hard to look past.

cocodrillo wrote:
Russ can chime in on the practicality of this, but if the light really stinks, what about dropping the shutter way down to like 1/50th of a second and trying to get those moments when the head is still, but everything else is moving. In other words, take advantage of the bad light. Definitely a trickier type of shot to get and not for all apparatus and possibly only viable with higher end athletes, but it might work.

On the actual pictures... very nice work. Don't sweat the watermark. Photo editors at publications don't. It is not hard to look past.

Sean

Too risky. If looking to shoot creatively and get a good one every now and then, I'd say yes. But, when you are expected to get 20-30 sellable shots of every gymnast that comes through your apparatus, you MUST be conscious of shutter speed. When it comes to sales, the thinking is totally reversed compared to what we think here. Noise, lighting, cycling lights... DOES NOT MATTER. Showing a face and being in focus... DOES. Parents don't notice what we notice when it comes to the mechanics of the image. If it's in focus, has a face, and shows some sort of action in the routine... it will sell. You're not a creative shooter when it comes to youth sales. You're a dutiful shooter.

Shane... I think you did well. Some work better than others, but overall... you're on the right track with you're thinking. Lighting doesn't matter. I shot over 30,000 images in one weekend for a company last year at ISO 25,600 and the images sold like crazy. So, don't sweat it.

mdalbyRegistered: Feb 06, 2011Total Posts: 418Country: United States

P Alesse wrote:
Lighting doesn't matter. I shot over 30,000 images in one weekend for a company last year at ISO 25,600 and the images sold like crazy. So, don't sweat it.

This is something hard to get over but I think it is correct. When these parents don't really have ANYTHING of any quality, getting that shot with the face, focus and action is what they are looking for.

mdalbyRegistered: Feb 06, 2011Total Posts: 418Country: United States

Shane,

I think you did well on these. I like =#7 reworked.

AqualungRegistered: May 19, 2007Total Posts: 2316Country: United States

Thanks for taking the time to leave comments and I really do appreciate it. This was a first for me, I shot with a great photographer here in Charleston and he had a really good set up, we expected about 600 kids but after day two we just were not seeing much movements on the photos (green screen) and the action photos were most done on the beam due to the lighting. I think we were our own worst enemy..wow ISO 25000..So use to MAXPREPS standards and making sure everything looks good we sometimes forget it's still looks great compared to what parents are getting. I still admire you guys who are shooting gymnastics...photos are that much more amazing especially the ones showing true action!

Not that I've ever wanted to disagree with Russ, but I honestly don't mind the watermark, mostly because I know why it's there. Actually for whatever reason, I find this particular watermark less distracting with these photos than some of the others you've posted. (Not a function of the watermark, but the images.)

With that said, I do like some of the less intrusive watermarks such as what Russ has with his images. There are good examples, but I don't know them off the top of my head.

Caleb,
Thanks..I have a simple watermark I normally put on them..my whole point as I think everyone knows is to try and keep kids from taking them off my fb page and if they do I think it is pretty obvious to anyone that they haven't paid for them. I flip flop on this daily...I have went with the keep it simple and get your name out when they use them to just making it's look almost unuseable so they won't take it and use it without paying...No win

On a seperate note...I got credentials for the Outback and Belk bowls..looking forward to that!

I'm not a pro shooter but would just echo some of the advice. Stopping motion blur and hitting focus is much more important than high iso noise. Don't worry about going higher than iso 6400 -- especially with your camera. Even for beam some of your shutter speeds were low enough to be limiting (on leaps etc) For floor you'll want quite a bit more. I'd try to see if you can stick with about 1/500 for beam and 1/800 for floor. If the lighting is good I'll go to 1/1000 for floor.

I can also support the comment that the parents can only really get crap on their own. I had a better setup than the average "soccer mom" with some idea of how to use it and I had largely given up on getting much beyond beam.

Now that I have a D700 I can do quite a bit better. Still not what the pro's can get but that's primarily because they are better photographers than I am, not the gear.

These shots are fine but a little too much noise reduction for my taste. Don't be afraid to shoot at ISO12800 with the D3s, and that could have doubled your shutter speed to 1/400. It appears the lights were cycling a bit but still manageable.

The candids are fantastic and parents love them. Also the coach-athlete interaction are a big hit before and after the routine, especially at the lower levels. But none of these matters if you don't have a good way of presenting these wonderful images in front of the parents. We cover more than 60+ gymnastics meets a season, and the biggest marketing tool for us are the 46" LCD displays we place on the floor. As we upload the locked files are thrown into the slideshow queue and cycled on the LCDs. It gets the parents attention, especially the tight candids shot with the 200/f2 lens.

I want to echo Paul's comments. I expect my shooters to give me 30+ properly framed, exposed, peak-action, sellable shots per routine rather than 1 spectacular-once-in-a-life time capture. This is the difference in the parents getting a full USB drive for $70 or a $20 8x10 print. And we sell hundreds of the USB drives on average at a meet.

-John

dj dunzieRegistered: Aug 14, 2006Total Posts: 7040Country: Canada

I think your re-worked set is great quite frankly. I get it that gymnastics is a tough go, and haven't got a lot of experience in it myself, so I'll just say that Paul's post sounds right on, and I think you're off to a great start!

As a professional gymnastics parent, I can say with great conviction that I would dig very deep into my wallet to purchase pictures like these. You have a great eye (and some very cute models). A remarkable first time effort!

All...
Sorry..I haven't checked this post in a week or so but wanted to say thank you for all your feedback...All are great points and I just have to start trusting the higher ISO... as far as noise reduction..this is pretty much straight out of the camera set to +5 and maybe just a slight bump in LR for NR and sharpness but probably less than +10 on the slider.

Looking forward to another chance to shoot..I just shot my first NFL game..pictures are posted on the sports forum Oakland @ Carolina...Merry Christmas all.